Well one of the most pointless wrappers ever... it seems to do the same as the original command...

But regardless I was thinking more in terms of pet2sfs ... in slax I have deb2lzm and tgz2lzm for slackware which are handy tools for quick tests.

The process is so simple it hardly warrents a wrapper really... an understanding of a linux file tree and the usual unpacking tools are all thats needed.

The only other point is compatability...sfs is not backwards compatible and versions 3 and 4 are not even that...as long as the sfs is made on the distro it will be used for then there is no problem.

As it happens I build my version 3 sfs on puppy 2 so it works for all. Version 4 I do with lucid for similar reasons. mksquashfs and unsquashfs are not tied to kernel versions either so building can be done outside of the kernel needed but that will not include the ability to use such as lzma or xz to create (unpack ok)

just to fill in a few blanks.

mike

pets2sfsgui - convert pets to sfs and combine sfs files into one. SFSconvert to convert between 3 and 4 versions

I think combining sfs to overcome the crappy needless limitations of puppies sfs handling is the daftest thing to come out of the puppy world. The rest is a 2 line job...unpack/pack. Also these 'wizards' leave no room to strip out the needless crud thats usually in there....a quick test before doing the job properly manually perhaps.

Was not impressed when there was the version 3 to 4 change which was not backwards compatible in order to appease the kernel gods either

yay rant over.

hotdog coaches

mike

ps ...no the daftest is using the devx files to supply tk/tcl or python or qt4 or...well really people what kind of minimalist distro is this??

pps and the kernel sources are 10 times the size needed to build drivers... is that a punishment for wanting to build yer own or something lol

I think combining sfs to overcome the crappy needless limitations of puppies sfs handling is the daftest thing to come out of the puppy world. The rest is a 2 line job...unpack/pack. Also these 'wizards' leave no room to strip out the needless crud thats usually in there....a quick test before doing the job properly manually perhaps.

Was not impressed when there was the version 3 to 4 change which was not backwards compatible in order to appease the kernel gods either

yay rant over.

hotdog coaches

mike

ps ...no the daftest is using the devx files to supply tk/tcl or python or qt4 or...well really people what kind of minimalist distro is this??

pps and the kernel sources are 10 times the size needed to build drivers... is that a punishment for wanting to build yer own or something lol

Those applications are very tiny and does just that what is wanted. Works very well and very quick. As for combining SFS files don't think it's daft at all. It's a quick fix and works without any problems whatsoever. No further changing of initrd? or whatever crap required. So if you are permanently running say JRE/wine/opera, etc. A quick combination of those sfs's into one works like a bomb. Easy fixes for laymen like me. LOL

my smallest sfs/module is around 200k but all load in a blink of an eye and I only have to replace the 200k if there is an update. java and wine...even more reason to keep separate.

If the initrd was written well in the first place this discussion would not be happening...slax managed it 8-9 years ago...whats puppies excuse?
Lazy pup and lighthouse do it, I do it...frogs do it, dogs do it, everybody but barry does it...lets do it, lets have one application per sfs.

{mikeb does a tap dance}

Of course it won't happen...change is something to avoid unless its someone elses update.

my smallest sfs/module is around 200k but all load in a blink of an eye and I only have to replace the 200k if there is an update. java and wine...even more reason to keep separate.

If the initrd was written well in the first place this discussion would not be happening...slax managed it 8-9 years ago...whats puppies excuse?
Lazy pup and lighthouse do it, I do it...frogs do it, dogs do it, everybody but barry does it...lets do it, lets have one application per sfs.

{mikeb does a tap dance}

Of course it won't happen...change is something to avoid unless its someone elses update.

mike.... who likes to let off steam ...

Just install the bloody pets or load the SFS's and then do a remaster. LOL

nah...I want a slim core for on a stick recovery times or maybe compiling or just to have less to upload...and don't want to declog old versions and remaster again every time one program changes.

Modular is fun to be, it stops you sinking when you are at sea.

Anyway whenever I remaster there is always one daft thing left undone..... doing the whole system at once means mire chance of dismal failure.

Notice how I turn frustration into rhyme.

michel

I only use JRE, wine and opera. Installed it and remastered. Not bothered to install anything else or run other SFS's. So, with that installed the base SFS is still only 120MB. I can live with thatLast edited by nic007 on Thu 30 Jan 2014, 11:59; edited 1 time in total

hi,
how is it that my browser's cache is limited to 30 MB, but the pup_rw/root/.cache folder continuously grows? Right now it is 67.2MB. What is that amount of data over the 30 MB?Last edited by fobq on Mon 24 Mar 2014, 00:53; edited 1 time in total

Didn't want to allow this very useful, simple tidbit from SFR to get lost in the shuffle - IMO, it sucessfully addresses one of a frugal Puppy's biggest shortcomings (a growing savefile), for those having difficulty with certain directories "sticking" between reboots, after being moved. From this thread - http://www.murga-linux.com/puppy/viewtopic.php?t=86187 -

SFR wrote:

The problem is that after moving the directory outside of the savefile and symlinking it back, we have a situation where the directory is still in the savefile (/initrd/pup_ro1/), but in tmpfs is symlink.
So, during saving the session, cp (used in snapmergepuppy) will refuse to overwrite a directory with a symlink.
BTW, perhaps it's possible, but I haven't found a way to force cp to overwrite a dir with a symlink...

A simple workaround could be:
1. Move the directory outside of the savefile.
2. Save the session (this will delete the dir from the savefile).
3. Then create the symlink in place of moved directory.
4. And save the session again.

Is my save file smart enough to know it's getting full or does it just corrupt everytime? Judging by my results, I believe the latter. Nothing worse than having a bunch of yield triangles appear at startup!

I personally like to keep a large cache in case I need to scrape anything out later.

You cannot post new topics in this forumYou cannot reply to topics in this forumYou cannot edit your posts in this forumYou cannot delete your posts in this forumYou cannot vote in polls in this forumYou cannot attach files in this forumYou can download files in this forum